That's the thing: value is relative, often to where your butt is parked. I'm sitting in a state where I can get a CCW by taking a joke of a "class" and then sending in the right paperwork. That CCW is honored by the majority of States, and honored by every state I can imagine visiting in the forseeable future. Heck, the reason I don't have a CCW yet is partly because I hardly need one - I can carry without a license while traveling and while in my own vehicle (traveling or just going to the gas station) and carry of long guns isn't restricted like it is with handguns...

So no, you won't catch me paying as much as someone living in NY or CA would be willing to. It would be nice for me to get it, but I wouldn't break the bank getting it done since the cost/benefit would skew too far to the "cost" side.

M. Sage - You nailed it. It is beyond frustrating. Wouldn't it be nice to have a nationally uniform shall-issue law, with 100% reciprosity? Maybe some day.

LEA's have cops that have not gone through the academy all the time... remember there is a broad interpenetration of what constitutes a LEO for the purpose of HR218.

Which is specifically why HR218 is written the way it is.... there are a number of places where you are a cop if they say you are a cop... there are a number of places where you are considered a LEO even if you are just the equivalent of a process server.

Let me state this again.

There are states in the U.S. which have ZERO requirements for training, and ZERO requirements for applicants.

There are some instances where individuals can be legally considered LEO's even if they are convicted felons... which is WHY HR218 contains wording which prohibits felons and prohibited persons from carrying weapons even if they have law enforcement credentials.

Buying CCW's as a reward for campaign contributions is a no-no.... however if a municipality wanted to charge a 1k application fee to apply for a job as an auxiliary reserve constable which went directly into the city's coffers and was not a 'private' donation there would be no problem with it.

We need to remember that we in CA have different standards of what constitutes a LEO... we have post certification and state wide standards of acceptance, as well as other criteria... which simply do not apply uniformly across the U.S.

There are still places where you get to be a deputy simply by applying for the job... which makes you a LEO... which allows you to carry a concealed weapon anywhere in the USA.

The $$$$ incentive for the local municipality simply makes it a viable proposition for a cash strapped city council.

there is one state in particular which has a specific exemption in the penal code which allows for municipalities to appoint a special class of Law enforcement officers who are considered independent contractors and for whom the state/municipality assumes no liability for their actions... they also have limited jurisdiction and are paid only nominal sums.... BUT they legally qualify as LEO's... and there IS precedent to back it up with regard to HR218.

Lets assume for a minute that everything I'm suggesting is on the up and up... and this is simply a case of you pay your 'application fee' you pass a background check and you get issued credentials...

How much is it worth to you?

I'd gladly pay $500 to be able to CCW legally. That's a very small price to pay for the added safety and security it would afford me and my family.

I'm disgusted by all the nae-sayers on this topic. Ajax22 is thinking outside the box here, he's trying to help us ALL. Just as the trailblazers of the OLL movement thought outside the box. Those trailblazers studied the law as it was written, applied it studiously, and WE have all benefitted. Just think where we'd be now if those trailblazers had listened to all their nae-sayers.... Ajax22 is not advocating that we all get credentials and go around arresting people, pretending to be cops. He's just saying...... You get credentialled, carry concealled, that's it!

__________________
"A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."
"Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson.
"a system of licensing the right of
self-defense, which doesn’t recognize self-defense as “good cause”
Don Kilmer

Um... no... they are NOT earned, they are simply issued, by cities or other governing entities... and in some places it is done with little or no qualification or requirements... CA has some requirements that must be met, but there are other places which do NOT have the same criteria, but still issue credentials which are valid for the purpose of concealed cary under the Law enforcement protection act.

Look, you may disagree with it morally/ethically etc. But it gets you a concealed Cary permit that is valid in any state in the union. INCLUDING CA and NYC.

You are correct, the Coast Guard recently sent us a letter stating they consider ALL employees of California State Lands Commission to be LEO's.

Yes Sir. Yet another chapter and verse that is ignored or disinterpreted to justify infringment. Maybe some day, this will be stacked on top of incorporation and we will actually freely exercise our right as it was designed.

I would like to see some real legal eagle types chime in on this idea. We can bat this idea around for weeks and in the end watch it falter in self-doubt and nay saying. This “outside the box” type thinking needs serious people who have legislative/ legal experience to contribute constructive ideas and criticism. Does the Calguns community have the horsepower and financial wherewithal within its ranks to get serious about this or is this just another flight of fantasy? Do I hear crickets in the distance… or the beginnings of a groundswell?

Yep... those credentials issued by nepotism and corruption are just as valid under federal law as those that are 'earned' through service to the state(king)...

I think I've heard the term 'loophole' bandied about before.... seems to be the mantra of the people who recognize that something is totally legal even if it does not sit with their personal ideology/agenda.

Yes the legislature could i(n theory) 'crack down' on this... it would have to occur at a federal level... essentially imposing harsher levels of qualification for consideration under the LEOSA... which would be VERY hard to get the legislature to pass.. since many many states would not meet the new 'qualifications'.... so I don't see that as a overly likely outcome.

Let me make this perfectly plain. I am NOT suggesting that we all run out and buy a municipality... that adds a level of complexity that is unnecessary.

There are plenty of townships/towns out there who can issue the credentials we want and $$$ talks... particularly to areas with a mean income of around 14k per year.... a cash injection of 10 million to a community of 2500 is a substantial enough bit of cash that they can't easily dismiss the probability.

Ok... some people may think its 'dubious' or a 'scam' but the fact of the matter is the law is the law... they wrote it.. they make us follow it... and what is proposed here is LEGAL... and even in a worst case scenario where the opposition rallies the troops and shuts us down we'd get a few years of legal CCW.... which is a few years of keeping our family safe... AND it could easily pave the way for national reciprocity of CCW permits....

Legal is legal.... CCW permits are just for that 1 time in 100 where you get hassled.... and even with one of those you don't always beat the ride... but with valid LEO credentials you WILL beat the rap.... the same was true for all our OLL endevors.

Look, I'm not saying this sort of thing is an ideal situation... but we ALREADY have an elite (LEO's) who get privilages that the rest of us are denied.

This is simply a broad lowering of the barriers to entry into that protected class (which shouldn't exist in the first place)

I dislike that this is nececary to exercise our rights... however, it IS legal... and it DOES allow us to exercise those rights....

Heck, I'd love to run detachable mags in my full featured AR.... but the MMG I have on it is simply the price I have to pay to legally do what I need to have the means to protect my family..... and now that I live and go to school in NYC, I have ZERO recourse or ability to have those means... they all live back in 'free' California...

I was originally just looking into this for personal and selfish reasons... but I think it could be a large and significant step forward in the advancement of the 2A in America.

Your Sheriff is the law of the land

January 14, 2009 by DrD

Quote:

Power of a “County Sheriff”

Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis spoke at a press conference following a recent U.S. District Court decision (Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J (2006)) and announced that all federal officials are forbidden to enter his county without his prior approval …… “If a sheriff doesn’t want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to leave, or retain them in custody.”

The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF and the IRS by Mattis and other members of the Wyoming Sheriff’s Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.

Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.”

Re-read this quote.

The court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state or federal official.”

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.”

If you can get a sheriff from ANY state to issue, as ALL 50 states are sovereign, then this idea looks like its good to go.

__________________
Have a great day

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

Of course, "I read it on the internet, but I ain't no lawyer." So which is correct? The smell test says the one where the feds can still enforce federal rules, I'd say.

Sorry.

7x57

__________________

What do you need guns for if you are going to send your children, seven hours a day, 180 days a year to government schools? What do you need the guns for at that point?-- R. C. Sproul, Jr. (unconfirmed)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulgron

I know every chance I get I'm going to accuse 7x57 of being a shill for LCAV. Because I can.

Sheriff Deputy's can also travel outside the county, just like the OP suggested City police can travel outside the city limits and still can carry CCW. Maybe at the county sheriff level there is more 'protection' vs city level.

__________________
Have a great day

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

Of course, "I read it on the internet, but I ain't no lawyer." So which is correct? The smell test says the one where the feds can still enforce federal rules, I'd say.

Sorry.

7x57

The story is somewhat true.

Quote:

Sheriff Mattis in a story in "The Spotlight" is quoted as having said
that Internet reports calling it a "court decision" and quoting the
sheriff saying he can detain federal officers in custody are wrong.
Mattis said the original report originated in Nashville, Tennessee in
1997, and also that the Wyoming Sheriffs Association was not involved.

Assuming that the story is a hoax, and that there is no 2:96-cv-099-J
or Castenada v USA, does that make the Constitution less applicable in
this instance? I don't think so. In fact, Sheriff Mattis has issued
notice to the federal government that they must secure his permission
before they can do business in Bighorn County, and so far, they have
complied with his request.

Right is still right, and the tenth amendment to the Constitution
gives powers not delegated to the United States (federal government)
by the Constitution, to only the states and the people. There are only
four law enforcement categories defined in the Constitution for the
federal government, and all others should be the premise of the states
and the people. Those categories are piracy, treason, counterfeiting,
and postal issues, and according to the Constitution, the supreme law
of the land, all other law categories are the premise of the states
and the people.

To paraphrase Alexander Hamilton, (from Federalist # 78) if the
Constitution doesn't give the fed the authority, any law they make is
invalid. Last I heard, that hadn't been changed by any amendment.

The way I see it is that we have two choices. We can sit back and
accept that the federal government is going to usurp our rights or we
can do as Sheriff Mattis has done, and put the federal government on
notice that they are not welcome in our states and counties without
the approval of law enforcement agents in those states. Montana has, I
understand, passed legislation that requires the federal government to
gain the permission of local sheriffs before attempting to conduct
federal business in any part of the state not ceded to the federal
government already. (Montana House Bill #415). Nevada just failed to
pass similar legislation, declaring the states sovereignty and
independence from the federal jurisdiction that has governed most of
the state. Too bad.

"We the people" are the first words of the Constitution. If we want to
remain first, we must declare our rights as guaranteed to us under
that great document. If we are not willing to do that, we have no
chance of retaining national sovereignty either. Get ready to welcome
the new world order, if you are not prepared to fight for your own
states sovereignty.

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

oh yeah, it should be deleted. We dont want those gun nuts talking about things that are legal to do again, now do we?

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by leok20

To me Law Enforcement are guilty until proven innocent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrage

Over reaction to non-crimes by State loyalists. If they keep up their heavy handed crap, soon it'll be a better gamble to shoot at cops before they even start bothering you considering the amount of time they're willing to put you in prison for if you cooperate.

True, but misleading. It implies that the sheriff has the absolute authority to do what he's doing, and that isn't at all clear. It's the authority that everyone is interested in, not a policy that the feds may simply have decided not to challenge at this time.

Here's another simple reality check: if county sheriffs have the kind of authority claimed, how could de facto segregation have been ended against the will of the Southern sheriffs? If he can throw out the feds, it seems the will of the federal courts could not have been imposed.

7x57

__________________

What do you need guns for if you are going to send your children, seven hours a day, 180 days a year to government schools? What do you need the guns for at that point?-- R. C. Sproul, Jr. (unconfirmed)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulgron

I know every chance I get I'm going to accuse 7x57 of being a shill for LCAV. Because I can.

If the idea is to find friendly towns willing to deputize, I suggest that it be only towns or cities which have already deputized 'auxilliary', 'volunteer', 'reserve', 'contingent' officers. Even moreso if they already deputize 'animal-control officer', 'wildlife control officer', "traffic control officer" or anything else fairly innocuous.

For the record, I am perfectly willing to take a few days off of work every year and go do forensic computer analysis in some Podunk jurisdiction ... maybe even 'on demand' as cases arose. I'm qualified, and they couldn't afford my billable-hour rate. 'Volunteering' my time in exchange for minimum wage and credentials is in everyone's interest.

Rather than creating a perfectly-legal fiction, offering genuine service seems more consistent with our goals.

So far a couple of states which have shown promise are: Ohio (expressly allows for non resident LEO's with case law to back it up), Pennsylvania (has a class of officer called 'constibles' for which the state is indemnified against the actions of the individual and has case law with HR218), Alaska (no residency requirement, VERY pro 2A), Wyoming,

Ones which will not work (usually for residency requirements for LEO's) are: Montana, California

I've made a few calls today, hopefully I can get some local help from some of the 2A lawyers in these various locations to sort through the local statutes and point me in the direction of 2A friendly locations..

If anyone has any knowledge of particularly 2A friendly towns, mayors, or sheriffs in other states please let me know.

If the idea is to find friendly towns willing to deputize, I suggest that it be only towns or cities which have already deputized 'auxilliary', 'volunteer', 'reserve', 'contingent' officers. Even moreso if they already deputize 'animal-control officer', 'wildlife control officer', "traffic control officer" or anything else fairly innocuous.

For the record, I am perfectly willing to take a few days off of work every year and go do forensic computer analysis in some Podunk jurisdiction ... maybe even 'on demand' as cases arose. I'm qualified, and they couldn't afford my billable-hour rate. 'Volunteering' my time in exchange for minimum wage and credentials is in everyone's interest.

Rather than creating a perfectly-legal fiction, offering genuine service seems more consistent with our goals.

I would certainly be willing to offer my skills and time. After all, there has to be some departments that could use a military trained Small Arms/Artillery Repairman every once in a while.

So far a couple of states which have shown promise are: Ohio (expressly allows for non resident LEO's with case law to back it up), Pennsylvania (has a class of officer called 'constibles' for which the state is indemnified against the actions of the individual and has case law with HR218), Alaska (no residency requirement, VERY pro 2A), Wyoming,

Ones which will not work (usually for residency requirements for LEO's) are: Montana, California

I've made a few calls today, hopefully I can get some local help from some of the 2A lawyers in these various locations to sort through the local statutes and point me in the direction of 2A friendly locations..

If anyone has any knowledge of particularly 2A friendly towns, mayors, or sheriffs in other states please let me know.

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

I put in the poll $500 because that is what I know that I would without any hesitation or thought drop on this. Depending on details, I could pay 1k or more but I would rather not. Basically, what I guess I am saying is that if this works I am in regardless up to $500 or $600 and beyond that, I still want to be kept in the loop because I would give it consideration.

Would this also exempt us from handgun roster requirements and maybe even “hi-cap” restrictions? That would make it worth even more.

All of this being said, I hate the fact that LEO’s get special treatment. It is like one that I know of that carries a switch blade. When asked “isn’t that illegal” his reply was “yeah, but no one cares because I am a cop”. I have never had any run ins with LEO’s other than getting pulled over once and let off with a warning and having one CHP officer start to search my truck when I pulled over to pull him out of a ditch. I have several friends that are good guys and LEO’s, but I kind of have a low level of respect for them as a whole. Despite all of that, if this would help me be able to exercise my rights, then I am game.

__________________WTB : A cheap beater .44 mag lever action rifle or carbine. Cosmetics do not matter, function and price are more important.

159

"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."

I dunno - I'm getting really bad flashbacks to the "Chief Thunder" case. That was the guy who made a sweetheart deal (ATF said "bribe") with some podunk PD to get them to sign LE sample letters, to import machine guns. When he was busted, he had ~150 full auto rifles sitting in a warehouse. He went away for a couple of years to Club Fed based on that. Call me paranoid, but the only way I'd play this game if I had strong assurances from legal authorities I trusted (somebody like Eugene Volokh or Chuck Michel, for example) that the whole scheme was legit.

This is why it is important to engage only departments (assuming we go for pre-existing towns) which have a history of issuing non-resident LEO credentials, and especially if they are issued for "non patrol" type roles like animal control, etc.

If we deal with such, and provide legitimate service to those communities ... where is the problem? With many small towns experiencing chronic budget/manpower problems, this as good of a win/win, "fully legit anyway you look at it" type of scenario.

This is why it is important to engage only departments (assuming we go for pre-existing towns) which have a history of issuing non-resident LEO credentials, and especially if they are issued for "non patrol" type roles like animal control, etc.

If we deal with such, and provide legitimate service to those communities ... where is the problem? With many small town experiencing chronic budget/manpower problems, this as good of a win/win, "fully legit anyway you look at it" type of scenario.

I think the key words are "legitimate service". Typically, the service is expressed in terms of work performed, whereas giving $$$ can be construed as some form of bribery. IANAL, but AFAIK the money does not even need to go to somebody's pocket - even if it goes into the town's budget, it can be construed to constitute bribery.

yea, ive batted the idea around and i actually know someone that has a vacation house in a small town, is friends with the sherriff and is a reserve sherriff of that town and carrys under LEO credentials, its pretty much the same thing carona did without the blatant bribes..

and for the LEO's that take offense at this, if its legal, you have to deal with it, if we bought one of these little 1 million dollar towns, for sale in northern california, incorporated, and built a police force made of 15,000 cal guns volunteers for a town with only 10 people, then so be it.

my idea would be, if someone applied for a CCW permit, was turned down, then was raped, or they had a family member shot during a mugging, wouldnt that be cause for ae lawsuits against the LEO that turned them down?

__________________
Jason M- My 5 year old is a NRA life member, are you?

yea, ive batted the idea around and i actually know someone that has a vacation house in a small town, is friends with the sherriff and is a reserve sherriff of that town and carrys under LEO credentials, its pretty much the same thing carona did without the blatant bribes..

and for the LEO's that take offense at this, if its legal, you have to deal with it, if we bought one of these little 1 million dollar towns, for sale in northern california, incorporated, and built a police force made of 15,000 cal guns volunteers for a town with only 10 people, then so be it.

my idea would be, if someone applied for a CCW permit, was turned down, then was raped, or they had a family member shot during a mugging, wouldnt that be cause for ae lawsuits against the LEO that turned them down?

If we did buy a little town in northern california I would GLADLY live there... Anyone else gonna jump on that boat? Hell I'll be the mayor